Secondary school with no setting and almost no homework

[thedogatemyzebra]

We had to move house over the summer holidays. So DD, who is academic and was meant to start secondary at a great grammar school, is now at the local comprehensive that we knew very little about before she started there. I was feeling ok about this, as it seems to have a good reputation, but have now found out that they don't set for anything (even maths) at any stage. DD was bored and frustrated at primary school, where they didn't have ability groups and she found it very slow going, particularly maths, and seemed to spend a fair amount of her time helping the other children. I'm now worried that this will happen again, and that she will be stuck very slowly going through the exam curriculum for 5 years. They also give almost no homework - she apparently does her maths homework while walking the short distance between school and home.
There are no other realistic schooling options where we are. Have others been in this situation? How did you support your DC?

Can you still check how the high/med/low attainers do on the new dfe site Talkin? I know you used to be able to.

Danica
They make it hard, but yes, its there ..... under
"Performance by Prior attainment"
example here of a school that does not set or stream BTW
www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/school/136715?tab=secondary

The latest research shows that setting is not actually beneficial for the majority of children. The new curriculum instead encourages the mastery approach which calls for all chn to study the same thing, however there will be very well planned differentiation to stretch the more able and support the less able.

Thanks Talkin

Just because they don't set does not mean that the work won't be differentiated. Good teachers will always ensure that happens.

The majority of schools these days don't set for non-core subjects such as History etc, so whether she's at the comp or a grammar might not make any difference in respect of those subjects.

She may well have been ahead at primary, but you may find that levels out now she has reached secondary and she may well be with children who are much brighter than she us. As a secondary teacher we often find that parents are suddenly surprised when their DD/DS is not always the top of the class when they move on to secondary and there are more children in the year to compete with.

Are the Nat4 and Nat5 children being taught in the same class? We moved away before this became an issue for us, but I would have thought that there should be that differentiation at least?

Sorry, I just realised she only just started secondary, so that won't be an issue yet. Apologies.

As of this year there is no English coursework either

If my understanding is correct a GCSE 9 will be a strong A* or slightly above under the new system, so schools will have to teach to this higher level to give pupils the chance to achieve that 9. Lower achievers may struggle with this in mixed sets, but if your daughter is able she should be given the education to give her the chance of achieving those 8s/9s.

My DD's school do set for English, Maths, PE, Science, but no other subjects. Pupils are told for these subjects they are all expected to be working towards the same thing whatever they level, ie the best pass they can achieve. DD doesn't let the fact that there are lower achievers in her classes get in her way, she works really hard and often stays in at lunch/afterschool to do that extra for coursework.

If your daughter has the right mind set as well as being bright, then hopefully she can achieve good results long term. If you have any concerns then do raise them with the school and ask for her to be challenged.

I'm not just concerned about exam results. I'm concerned that 1) she should get a good overall education, and 2) she should be challenged, so that she enjoys learning, and also so that she doesn't get used to coasting because she is at the top of the class. The last thing I want is for her to go very slowly through the exam curriculum for years, because that's how long a few of the children need. Even if she then comes out with good grades. At the moment she is keen to work hard, but she is beginning to be bored in some subjects already, and appears to be finding almost everything easy. After half a term they have not yet done any maths that she didn't do at primary. There is almost no homework, and she has about as long at home in the evening as she has at school during the day. So it would be very easy for her just to become bored, lazy and to vegetate. She does do school clubs and outside activities, but I feel as though she is still at primary, rather than at a more serious school where she can really get down to learning at her own level, which is what I was hoping for. I hate the view that as long as everyone passes some not very difficult (for her) exams after 5 years, everything is fine.
The school responded to my email to say that everything is fine, but I will arrange a meeting. Without much hope though. And I'm doing some educational things with her at home.

I agree with what you are saying op. I wouldn't be happy with that.

I agree with you as far as your child goes (I think setting is better) and as a teacher, teaching streamed classes is less challenging, but educational research says otherwise: results are generally better where students aren't streamed. Either way, it's their decision.

Are results for the most able at maths better when they aren't streamed? (Sorry not read whole thread.)

Setted i mean

No, Danica. Results for the whole cohort are generally better when they're not streamed. And I get that parents of able students will see that as unfair, but the school will make decisions for everyone, not just the most able. I would still prefer to teach streamed classes because the work involved in differentiating for students from grades 0-9 is mind-blowing and unreasonable, but again it the school's call.

I'm glad dd's comp does set as it works much better for her than op is describing.

A lot of the research I've seen about the effectiveness of mixed ability teaching over setting in maths is by Jo Boaler and there is a big fat question mark about her research methods.

Of course, and if my child benefited from setting I would want setting too

As a subject head in a secondary, I can tell you that no-one wants their child to be streamed if the child is less able. Usually it isn't couched like that: they are 'distracted' or 'needing more challenge' (when they can't actually do the basics!) or there is a 'personality clash' with the teacher. It comes down to the usual: everyone wants what is best for their own child, and schools cannot deliver that to everyone.

OP it is not unusual I think to spend the first bit of secondary going over what might have been done already by some/most in primary. Furthermore, our experience was very much that some subjects in maths particularly, but also english were covered at a very different point in the school life. Eg, DD3 started fractions mid primary in England, but DD1 (gifted at maths, so not for lack of ability) didn't do any fractions till the end of S1. It is just different, and for us was a huge adjustment. You will also find it challenging to talk to staff about it, because most of them just won't grasp that it can be done in any other way. We've moved in both directions, and found teachers in both countries completely unable or unwilling to see that the DC could be taught in any way other than the way that it was done by them. The effect that SATs, league tables and the like has had in England is starkly revealed I think when you find yourself switching between systems that most people do not see as being any different.

Here's a link to a discussion about the research on mixed ability teaching:

Like a lot of trainee teachers, I was told on my PGCE course that the empirical evidence strongly supported mixed ability. It was a bit of a shock to look at this evidence and see how poor much of it is....

teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/2015/11/29/why-i-am-against-mixed-ability-part-2/

After half a term they have not yet done any maths that she didn't do at primary.
My Y7 is at a grammar school and they are still recapping primary maths in unsetted classes.I guess they have to ascertain their grasp of the basics before they move on.

I do think though mixed ability sets in a comp is absolute pants!
.Why should the bright ones be used to pull up the results of teh weak ones.
OP if you really have no other educational options, then I would fight to get this changed .Stand for governor, connect with other parents who feel the same way and lobby the HT, the LEA, the governing body etc.

Well, we don't have grammar schools in Scotland for a start....

My child is in S2 in a high performing state secondary (comprehensive) in Scotland. From January in S1 they were set for Maths, from the start of S2 they were put in sets for Science, and after Christmas this year, they will be set for English too. At the end of S2 they will start picking their subjects to take forward for exams and aim to group children of similar ability together, depending on demand for the subject.

Setting is VERY common in Scottish schools from what i've seen but it will depend on the size of the school - if the year group is very small they might just not be able to achieve it. Although even with fewer than 100 children in the year I'd still expect there to be three groups for core subjects like English/Maths.

I would be exploring all of this with your child's year head or the Headteacher.

I'm against mixed ability too, but the preponderance of the evidence tells me I am wrong